Course Reflection

Note: Some of the strategies and feedback below were given to me during RWIT meetings I attended during this past term for this class. I have denoted those specific bulletpoints with asterisks.

  • Drafting
  • Changing arguments as the essay progresses
  • Conferencing to get outside viewpoints and analysis on your work
  • Making conclusions more significant
  • Cutting down extraneous detail*
  • Eliminating unnecessary adverbs*

Of all of the strategies in the list above, and the large amount of feedback I received during this class, I think the most universal and helpful strategy I employed was changing my arguments as the essay progressed. Especially because Cultures of Place was such a theoretical and thoughtful class, I can’t honestly say that I understood every Project the first time I read the guidelines. Furthermore, as I progressed during the research and planning steps, I learned so much new information that it made sense to change and adapt my question and theses in accordance with this. In previous writing classes, I think the assignments were more clear and also they were much simpler to understand so I didn’t have to do as much interpreting with the guidelines as I did in this class, which is why this was a new strategy. I definitely see the value in it now, though, because if I had started with my initial idea for all three projects I doubt I would be as satisfied with the results as I am and I definitely would not have learned as much as I did. Also, I understand that this is a very vague takeaway strategy from the class and I think that this comes from an amalgamation of other features about the class, including, but not limited to, the longer drafting stage, conferencing with peers and the instructors, and group discussions. However, all of those strategies are not necessarily sustainable for me in future writing contexts but I think that at least setting a personal goal to allow my arguments to progress and change will be both feasible and beneficial for me.

I think this strategy is very evident throughout all three projects, especially seeing all of the material in this portfolio. The most obvious example is with Project 2, where in the pre-drafting materials tab I have two formal project proposals. Between the two, there is a stark progression with my initial project proposal including two ideas about spaces in my hometown while my revised proposal had the topic I eventually wrote the essay about. Beyond this though, among all three projects there are drastic overhauls after every drafting stage followed by a conference. For example, in Project 1, between the workshop draft and conference draft, my thesis changed completely and this is reflected in the two drafts, as well as in my post workshop revision plan. I was initially simply evaluating “Black and Yellow’s” effectiveness at being critical regionalist but then switched to actually analyzing its motives and concluded that although it strove to be critically regionalist, it fell short. Project 3 provided even more complications because it was supposed to include media, evidence, and my argument  presented via a webpage. Thus, I not only had to revise my approach to essay writing, but also try and understand how to best present an argument on a webpage. Once again, my initial argument changed significantly: from merely proving that the Top of the Hop was a successful, multipurpose, space to claiming that it was an entirely new type of third-space, and then extending that argument to making a commentary on happy places. All of these changes, in each of the three projects, were significant edits to my initial arguments and comparing my final products to their drafting stages highlights these changes.

I am very satisfied that I developed and adopted this strategy throughout this Writing 5 class. In retrospect, if I had been adamant and stuck to my first arguments and structures, my projects would have been nowhere near as thorough and insightful. I quickly realized that I would face trouble turning these initial arguments into successful essays and instead let my research and writing processes guide me, as well as feedback from my peers and the instructor, to refine and consolidate my ideas into thoughtful arguments and theses. While I won’t have so much time and support to guide me through my revision process, I think that I can make it a goal to carry this strategy forward with me throughout the rest of the time I spend writing in college and beyond. The bare bones of this strategy was basically taking time to think about the assignment, researching the project and my ideas thoroughly, writing, and then rereading and revising my progress. This is definitely more time consuming than just writing an essay straight but this class and the main three projects I completed in it definitely proved to me that it is far more beneficial to take the time to go through these steps because the final product will bring me a lot more satisfaction. Overall, looking back on my writing this term and in my Writing 5 class, I see a lot of growth compared to the writer I was in high school. Obviously the rhetorical and stylistic strategies I learned in Writing 5 helped this along, as well as the rigorous drafting and revision guidelines, but I think that allowing my arguments to progress and adapt organically was the primary catalyst of this big change. It is very clear to me when I go through my past projects, from my initial drafts to the final essay, how much my ideas evolved and what a positive impact this had on my product. I think this strategy will serve me well later on in my college career.